Who's making the switch to Nikon / D800

echo wrote in post #13934362
It does sound very tempting - will the Nikon let you do Live View focusing as with the 5D? I tend to MF using that most of the time taking portraits now.

Why do you manual focus out of curiosity?

RhysPhotograph.Me wrote in post #13934628
Why do you manual focus out of curiosity?

When shooting landscapes, often you're using hyperfocal distance or tilt-Shift or other MF-only lenses.

When shooting portraits using a fast lens and a 5D2, you can't rely on outer AF points doing the job properly...

For those considering the D800 switch...

Are any of you concerned with the recent technical manuel released by Nikon addressing the D800's blur and divergence issues? It seems they don't recommend going higher than F8-F11 without sacrificing details in addition to a tip for using the live view stating that the mirror movement can cause photo blurring.

I normally shoot landscapes on a tripod with higher depth of fields but the fact that Nikon appear to be concerned enough about motion blur to release a technical manuel kinda concerns me. For those with more technical knowledge, would shooting at a lower resolution avoid this issue or is it simply a byproduct of the 36mp sensor? Just wondering what others thoughts were on this.

CajunJosh wrote in post #13934706
For those considering the D800 switch...

Are any of you concerned with the recent technical manuel released by Nikon addressing the D800's blur and divergence issues? It seems they don't recommend going higher than F8-F11 without sacrificing details in addition to a tip for using the live view stating that the mirror movement can cause photo blurring.

I normally shoot landscapes on a tripod with higher depth of fields but the fact that Nikon appear to be concerned enough about motion blur to release a technical manuel kinda concerns me. For those with more technical knowledge, would shooting at a lower resolution avoid this issue or is it simply a byproduct of the 36mp sensor? Just wondering what others thoughts were on this.

To avoid recording motion on more than 1 pixel (blur) you will to use a shutter speed approx. 0.3 stops faster than a 5Dii.
If you plan to resize the image later to 21mp, then you can shoot at the same shutter speed as a 5Dii.

CajunJosh wrote in post #13934706
For those considering the D800 switch...

Are any of you concerned with the recent technical manuel released by Nikon addressing the D800's blur and divergence issues? It seems they don't recommend going higher than F8-F11 without sacrificing details in addition to a tip for using the live view stating that the mirror movement can cause photo blurring.

It's due to diffraction. On the D800, the Airy disk will exceed the size of a single photosite at f/8, and the size of a single Bayer cell at f/16. Therefore, going on full stops, if you go a stop beyond f/11 (i.e. f/16) you'll start to get diffraction-related softening.

Mirror slap and subsequent vibration is an issue with all SLRs. It's no worse on the D800 than any other camera, viewed at the same print size. Viewed at 100%, on the other hand, motion blur which may just cover one pixel on a lesser sensor may cover three or four on the D800. This gives the appearance of more blur, but 100% on the D800 represents much greater magnification than 100% on a lesser sensor. Printed at the same size, the motion blur will look the same.

So Shadow would you say that there is a sweet spot for megapixels at which anything more starts to drastically decrease the depth of field you are capable of getting?

CajunJosh wrote in post #13935028
So Shadow would you say that there is a sweet spot for megapixels at which anything more starts to drastically decrease the depth of field you are capable of getting?

No.

You will never lose image quality by increasing resolution. At most, you will become limited by diffraction rather than sensor resolution; however, on a full-frame sensor, you won't even begin to suffer diffraction-related effects at f/11 until around 60MP. Not that you won't get resolution improvement beond 60MP, however - just that you won't get the full benefit of each extra megapixel.

A lot of landscape photography is done around f/8-f/11 on full frame, and, using tilt-shift lenses, it is possible to shoot at even wider apertures while keeping the entire landscape in focus.

CajunJosh wrote in post #13935028
So Shadow would you say that there is a sweet spot for megapixels at which anything more starts to drastically decrease the depth of field you are capable of getting?

Increasing pixel density does not reduce resolution; it just makes it harder to get the same pixel-level contrast. Nikon's "warning" is to let people know that getting the same pixel-level contrast won't be automatic; it may require some extra care.

That's really just plain old common sense, not some technological revelation or special characteristic of the D800. However, even if you don't take extra care, you will still get at least a slightly higher quality image with the higher pixel density.

The fact is, even with a significant blur, the image is more detailed with the higher pixel density. Total blur = analog optical blur + pixel size.

Shadowblade wrote in post #13934701
When shooting landscapes, often you're using hyperfocal distance or tilt-Shift or other MF-only lenses.

When shooting portraits using a fast lens and a 5D2, you can't rely on outer AF points doing the job properly...

Exactly!

What the D800/D800E costs the dealer:

vipergts831 wrote in post #13939243
What the D800/D800E costs the dealer:

Damn that's a nice profit...

cankon wrote in post #13940305
Damn that's a nice profit...

That is funny I was thinking that is not enough. They have to pony up a lot of cash and overhead etc. for just $300.00. My local camera shop has 3~4 people and they don't really sell that much I don't know how they do it. I would like to buy something from them but they never have anything I want.

Yeah I agree David, seems like a low profit margin, but I have no knowledge of such things, so I could be wrong

cankon wrote in post #13940305
Damn that's a nice profit...

It's not profit until all the costs of running the business (rent, staff etc) have been paid.

10% markup isn't much at all. I used to work for a big supermarket group and they worked on 300-400% for clothing!

10% on electronics isn't bad at all. When you see what they get for accessories it will all make sense.